Delay in Forwarding FIR Under Section 157 CrPC Not Fatal: Supreme Court Upholds Murder Conviction Based on Credible Eyewitness Testimony
Case Name: Ombir Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Another
Citation: 2020 INSC 405
Date of Judgment/Order: 26 May 2020
Bench: N.V. Ramana, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, Sanjiv Khanna
Held: The Supreme Court held that mere delay in forwarding the FIR to the Magistrate under Section 157 CrPC does not warrant acquittal unless the accused demonstrates prejudice, and upheld the conviction for murder based on consistent and reliable eyewitness testimony corroborated by medical and forensic evidence.
Summary: The appellant challenged his conviction under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act for the murder of Abhaiveer Singh Bhadoria @ Munna. The principal grounds of challenge were alleged unreliability of eyewitnesses, delay of eleven days in forwarding the FIR to the Magistrate, and alleged infirmities in investigation, including non-mentioning of the deceased’s name in certain field-unit records.
The Supreme Court reiterated settled law that compliance with Section 157 CrPC is an external check against manipulation of FIRs, but delay by itself does not vitiate the prosecution unless prejudice is shown. The Court examined the FIR, post-mortem report, inquest documents, and eyewitness testimonies of PW-1 and PW-2, and found them consistent, natural, and trustworthy. The presence of human blood on the witnesses’ clothes, medical evidence of multiple firearm injuries, and corroborative circumstances such as the appellant’s abscondence further strengthened the prosecution case.
The Court rejected the argument that acquittal of a co-accused entitled the appellant to parity, holding that benefit of doubt was extended to the co-accused on distinct evidentiary grounds. Minor lapses in investigation, including errors by the field unit, were held inconsequential in light of overwhelming substantive evidence.
Decision: The criminal appeal was dismissed. The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction and sentence of life imprisonment imposed on the appellant under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act, holding that the prosecution had proved its case beyond reasonable doubt.